Official: County Anti-union Organizer Details Cedarbrook Effort

April 13, 1986|The Morning Call

An organizer for the National Union of Hospital and Health Care Employees said the way Lehigh County administrators handled theunion's request for a nursing home employee list is typical anti-union behavior.

"They were wrong on this issue from day one," said John August, organizer for the union's regional district 1199P, yesterday. "They will make any attempt to throw up a smoke screen to put the blame on anyone else other than themselves."

On Friday, county Executive David K. Bausch, county Personnel Director Charles Dorn Jr. and county Administrator John Kachmar agreed to release the names and addresses of the 750 non-professional employees of Cedarbrook Nursing Home and the Fountain Hill Annex.

Kachmar yesterday said the list is being prepared and will be given to the union sometime next week.

The union had requested the list on Feb. 5. The Bausch administration had steadfastly refused to release the information, saying it wanted to protect the privacy of the health-care workers. But county solicitor Lawrence Brenner said the information is public under the state's right-to-know law.

August said the Bausch administration has tried to use the request to bring about bias against organizing efforts. He said the list was never a major issue for the union, but the county turned it into a media event.

The union was not informed of the decision to comply with the law. Instead, August notes, Kachmar and Dorn went to the media. "It is a typical employer tactic in an anti-union campaign to make the union appear to be an outside force," August said.

August takes umbrage to a list of requests the county has asked the union to follow. He said the requests suggest that the union is acting improperly.

One such request was that "the union conduct themselves in a fashion that does not disrupt care to elderly patients in county facilities."

August said the union would never do anything to jeopardize patientcare. Besides, he said, the county will not allow union organizers into the facilities. If anybody is disrupting patient care, August charges, the administration is. He said county officials and nursing supervisors keep calling the workers into meetings where they campaign against the union.

"The county has been doing this for the last three months and I'm sure they'll continue to do this," August said. "They're not going to let us inside the facility to campaign. It's ridiculous."

As someone who recently joined Bausch's staff, Kachmar said he doesn't know if August's allegations are true.

"I'm sure there have been conversations at the work site about unionization (by) both sides," Kachmar said.

August said it is only a matter of time before the union becomes the official representative. To speed up the process, August has challenged Kachmar to check the union cards signed by the workers. Such a check, he said, will show that a majority has signed the cards asking for union representation.

In a certified letter to Kachmar, August has proposed that an independent third party, selected by mutual consent, conduct a card check.

Recognition of a majority would do away with the need for an election under the auspices of the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, August said.

August would not publicly reveal what percentage of the 750 employees have signed cards. He would only say, "We absolutely have a substantial majority."

The union has already notified the labor board that it would like an election to take place. August said he expects an election to take place within a month.

Kachmar said he has not received the letter but doesn't expect the county to alter its position in favor of a secret-ballot election.

Efforts by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees to unionize the workers at the nursing homes failed in 1978 and 1980.